Efficacy of endotracheal intubation in helicopter cabin vs. ground: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Background Pre-hospital endotracheal intubation (ETI) is a sophisticated procedure with a comparatively high failure rate. Especially, ETI in confined spaces may result in higher difficulty, longer times, and a higher failure rate. This study analyses if Helicopter Emergency Medical Services (HEMS)...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Autor*in: |
Kolaparambil Varghese, Lydia Johnson [verfasserIn] Völlering, Jan-Jakob [verfasserIn] De Robertis, Edoardo [verfasserIn] Hinkelbein, Jochen [verfasserIn] Schmitz, Jan [verfasserIn] Warnecke, Tobias [verfasserIn] |
---|
Format: |
E-Artikel |
---|---|
Sprache: |
Englisch |
Erschienen: |
2024 |
---|
Schlagwörter: |
---|
Anmerkung: |
© The Author(s) 2024 |
---|
Übergeordnetes Werk: |
Enthalten in: Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine - BioMed Central, 2008, 32(2024), 1 vom: 10. Mai |
---|---|
Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:32 ; year:2024 ; number:1 ; day:10 ; month:05 |
Links: |
---|
DOI / URN: |
10.1186/s13049-024-01213-1 |
---|
Katalog-ID: |
SPR055813836 |
---|
LEADER | 01000naa a22002652 4500 | ||
---|---|---|---|
001 | SPR055813836 | ||
003 | DE-627 | ||
005 | 20240511064715.0 | ||
007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
008 | 240511s2024 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
024 | 7 | |a 10.1186/s13049-024-01213-1 |2 doi | |
035 | |a (DE-627)SPR055813836 | ||
035 | |a (SPR)s13049-024-01213-1-e | ||
040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
041 | |a eng | ||
082 | 0 | 4 | |a 610 |q VZ |
100 | 1 | |a Kolaparambil Varghese, Lydia Johnson |e verfasserin |0 (orcid)0000-0002-2247-5395 |4 aut | |
245 | 1 | 0 | |a Efficacy of endotracheal intubation in helicopter cabin vs. ground: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
264 | 1 | |c 2024 | |
336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
500 | |a © The Author(s) 2024 | ||
520 | |a Background Pre-hospital endotracheal intubation (ETI) is a sophisticated procedure with a comparatively high failure rate. Especially, ETI in confined spaces may result in higher difficulty, longer times, and a higher failure rate. This study analyses if Helicopter Emergency Medical Services (HEMS) intubation (time-to) success are influenced by noise, light, and restricted space in comparison to ground intubation. Available literature reporting these parameters was very limited, thus the reported differences between ETI in helicopter vs. ground by confronting parameters such as time to secure airway, first pass success rate and Cormack-Lehane Score were analysed. Methods A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted using PUBMED, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Ovid on October 15th, 2022. The database search provided 2322 studies and 6 studies met inclusion and quality criteria. The research was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42022361793). Results A total of six studies were selected and analysed as part of the systematic review and meta-analysis. The first pass success rate of ETI was more likely to fail in the helicopter setting as compared to the ground (82,4% vs. 87,3%), but the final success rate was similar between the two settings (96,8% vs. 97,8%). The success rate of intubation in literature was reported higher in physician-staffed HEMS than in paramedic-staffed HEMS. The impact of aircraft type and location inside the vehicle on intubation success rates was inconclusive across studies. The meta-analysis revealed inconsistent results for the mean duration of intubation, with one study reporting shorter intubation times in helicopters (13,0s vs.15,5s), another reporting no significant differences (16,5s vs. 16,8s), and a third reporting longer intubation times in helicopters (16,1s vs. 15,0s). Conclusion Further research is needed to assess the impact of environmental factors on the quality of ETI on HEMS. While the success rate of endotracheal intubation in helicopters vs. on the ground is not significantly different, the duration and time to secure the airway, and Cormack-Lehane Score may be influenced by environmental factors. However, the limited number of studies reporting on these factors highlights the need for further research in this area. | ||
650 | 4 | |a Endotracheal intubation |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
650 | 4 | |a Systematic review |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
650 | 4 | |a Meta-analysis |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
650 | 4 | |a Helicopter |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
650 | 4 | |a Ground |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
650 | 4 | |a First pass success rate |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
650 | 4 | |a HEMS |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
650 | 4 | |a Time of intubation |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
700 | 1 | |a Völlering, Jan-Jakob |e verfasserin |0 (orcid)0009-0002-0516-7785 |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a De Robertis, Edoardo |e verfasserin |0 (orcid)0000-0001-9182-6964 |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Hinkelbein, Jochen |e verfasserin |0 (orcid)0000-0003-3585-9459 |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Schmitz, Jan |e verfasserin |0 (orcid)0000-0003-0282-097X |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Warnecke, Tobias |e verfasserin |0 (orcid)0000-0003-4423-6114 |4 aut | |
773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine |d BioMed Central, 2008 |g 32(2024), 1 vom: 10. Mai |w (DE-627)582019125 |w (DE-600)2455990-8 |x 1757-7241 |7 nnns |
773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:32 |g year:2024 |g number:1 |g day:10 |g month:05 |
856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13049-024-01213-1 |m X:SPRINGER |x Resolving-System |z kostenfrei |3 Volltext |
912 | |a SYSFLAG_0 | ||
912 | |a GBV_SPRINGER | ||
912 | |a SSG-OLC-PHA | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_11 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_20 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_22 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_23 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_24 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_31 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_39 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_40 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_60 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_62 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_63 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_65 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_69 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_73 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_74 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_95 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_105 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_110 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_151 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_161 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_170 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_206 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_213 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_230 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_285 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_293 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_602 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2003 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2014 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4012 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4037 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4112 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4125 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4126 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4249 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4305 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4306 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4307 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4313 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4322 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4323 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4324 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4325 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4338 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4367 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4700 | ||
951 | |a AR | ||
952 | |d 32 |j 2024 |e 1 |b 10 |c 05 |
author_variant |
v l j k vlj vljk j j v jjv r e d re red j h jh j s js t w tw |
---|---|
matchkey_str |
article:17577241:2024----::fiayfnorcelnuainneiotraivgonaytmt |
hierarchy_sort_str |
2024 |
publishDate |
2024 |
allfields |
10.1186/s13049-024-01213-1 doi (DE-627)SPR055813836 (SPR)s13049-024-01213-1-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 VZ Kolaparambil Varghese, Lydia Johnson verfasserin (orcid)0000-0002-2247-5395 aut Efficacy of endotracheal intubation in helicopter cabin vs. ground: a systematic review and meta-analysis 2024 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Author(s) 2024 Background Pre-hospital endotracheal intubation (ETI) is a sophisticated procedure with a comparatively high failure rate. Especially, ETI in confined spaces may result in higher difficulty, longer times, and a higher failure rate. This study analyses if Helicopter Emergency Medical Services (HEMS) intubation (time-to) success are influenced by noise, light, and restricted space in comparison to ground intubation. Available literature reporting these parameters was very limited, thus the reported differences between ETI in helicopter vs. ground by confronting parameters such as time to secure airway, first pass success rate and Cormack-Lehane Score were analysed. Methods A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted using PUBMED, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Ovid on October 15th, 2022. The database search provided 2322 studies and 6 studies met inclusion and quality criteria. The research was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42022361793). Results A total of six studies were selected and analysed as part of the systematic review and meta-analysis. The first pass success rate of ETI was more likely to fail in the helicopter setting as compared to the ground (82,4% vs. 87,3%), but the final success rate was similar between the two settings (96,8% vs. 97,8%). The success rate of intubation in literature was reported higher in physician-staffed HEMS than in paramedic-staffed HEMS. The impact of aircraft type and location inside the vehicle on intubation success rates was inconclusive across studies. The meta-analysis revealed inconsistent results for the mean duration of intubation, with one study reporting shorter intubation times in helicopters (13,0s vs.15,5s), another reporting no significant differences (16,5s vs. 16,8s), and a third reporting longer intubation times in helicopters (16,1s vs. 15,0s). Conclusion Further research is needed to assess the impact of environmental factors on the quality of ETI on HEMS. While the success rate of endotracheal intubation in helicopters vs. on the ground is not significantly different, the duration and time to secure the airway, and Cormack-Lehane Score may be influenced by environmental factors. However, the limited number of studies reporting on these factors highlights the need for further research in this area. Endotracheal intubation (dpeaa)DE-He213 Systematic review (dpeaa)DE-He213 Meta-analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Helicopter (dpeaa)DE-He213 Ground (dpeaa)DE-He213 First pass success rate (dpeaa)DE-He213 HEMS (dpeaa)DE-He213 Time of intubation (dpeaa)DE-He213 Völlering, Jan-Jakob verfasserin (orcid)0009-0002-0516-7785 aut De Robertis, Edoardo verfasserin (orcid)0000-0001-9182-6964 aut Hinkelbein, Jochen verfasserin (orcid)0000-0003-3585-9459 aut Schmitz, Jan verfasserin (orcid)0000-0003-0282-097X aut Warnecke, Tobias verfasserin (orcid)0000-0003-4423-6114 aut Enthalten in Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine BioMed Central, 2008 32(2024), 1 vom: 10. Mai (DE-627)582019125 (DE-600)2455990-8 1757-7241 nnns volume:32 year:2024 number:1 day:10 month:05 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13049-024-01213-1 X:SPRINGER Resolving-System kostenfrei Volltext SYSFLAG_0 GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 32 2024 1 10 05 |
spelling |
10.1186/s13049-024-01213-1 doi (DE-627)SPR055813836 (SPR)s13049-024-01213-1-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 VZ Kolaparambil Varghese, Lydia Johnson verfasserin (orcid)0000-0002-2247-5395 aut Efficacy of endotracheal intubation in helicopter cabin vs. ground: a systematic review and meta-analysis 2024 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Author(s) 2024 Background Pre-hospital endotracheal intubation (ETI) is a sophisticated procedure with a comparatively high failure rate. Especially, ETI in confined spaces may result in higher difficulty, longer times, and a higher failure rate. This study analyses if Helicopter Emergency Medical Services (HEMS) intubation (time-to) success are influenced by noise, light, and restricted space in comparison to ground intubation. Available literature reporting these parameters was very limited, thus the reported differences between ETI in helicopter vs. ground by confronting parameters such as time to secure airway, first pass success rate and Cormack-Lehane Score were analysed. Methods A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted using PUBMED, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Ovid on October 15th, 2022. The database search provided 2322 studies and 6 studies met inclusion and quality criteria. The research was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42022361793). Results A total of six studies were selected and analysed as part of the systematic review and meta-analysis. The first pass success rate of ETI was more likely to fail in the helicopter setting as compared to the ground (82,4% vs. 87,3%), but the final success rate was similar between the two settings (96,8% vs. 97,8%). The success rate of intubation in literature was reported higher in physician-staffed HEMS than in paramedic-staffed HEMS. The impact of aircraft type and location inside the vehicle on intubation success rates was inconclusive across studies. The meta-analysis revealed inconsistent results for the mean duration of intubation, with one study reporting shorter intubation times in helicopters (13,0s vs.15,5s), another reporting no significant differences (16,5s vs. 16,8s), and a third reporting longer intubation times in helicopters (16,1s vs. 15,0s). Conclusion Further research is needed to assess the impact of environmental factors on the quality of ETI on HEMS. While the success rate of endotracheal intubation in helicopters vs. on the ground is not significantly different, the duration and time to secure the airway, and Cormack-Lehane Score may be influenced by environmental factors. However, the limited number of studies reporting on these factors highlights the need for further research in this area. Endotracheal intubation (dpeaa)DE-He213 Systematic review (dpeaa)DE-He213 Meta-analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Helicopter (dpeaa)DE-He213 Ground (dpeaa)DE-He213 First pass success rate (dpeaa)DE-He213 HEMS (dpeaa)DE-He213 Time of intubation (dpeaa)DE-He213 Völlering, Jan-Jakob verfasserin (orcid)0009-0002-0516-7785 aut De Robertis, Edoardo verfasserin (orcid)0000-0001-9182-6964 aut Hinkelbein, Jochen verfasserin (orcid)0000-0003-3585-9459 aut Schmitz, Jan verfasserin (orcid)0000-0003-0282-097X aut Warnecke, Tobias verfasserin (orcid)0000-0003-4423-6114 aut Enthalten in Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine BioMed Central, 2008 32(2024), 1 vom: 10. Mai (DE-627)582019125 (DE-600)2455990-8 1757-7241 nnns volume:32 year:2024 number:1 day:10 month:05 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13049-024-01213-1 X:SPRINGER Resolving-System kostenfrei Volltext SYSFLAG_0 GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 32 2024 1 10 05 |
allfields_unstemmed |
10.1186/s13049-024-01213-1 doi (DE-627)SPR055813836 (SPR)s13049-024-01213-1-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 VZ Kolaparambil Varghese, Lydia Johnson verfasserin (orcid)0000-0002-2247-5395 aut Efficacy of endotracheal intubation in helicopter cabin vs. ground: a systematic review and meta-analysis 2024 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Author(s) 2024 Background Pre-hospital endotracheal intubation (ETI) is a sophisticated procedure with a comparatively high failure rate. Especially, ETI in confined spaces may result in higher difficulty, longer times, and a higher failure rate. This study analyses if Helicopter Emergency Medical Services (HEMS) intubation (time-to) success are influenced by noise, light, and restricted space in comparison to ground intubation. Available literature reporting these parameters was very limited, thus the reported differences between ETI in helicopter vs. ground by confronting parameters such as time to secure airway, first pass success rate and Cormack-Lehane Score were analysed. Methods A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted using PUBMED, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Ovid on October 15th, 2022. The database search provided 2322 studies and 6 studies met inclusion and quality criteria. The research was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42022361793). Results A total of six studies were selected and analysed as part of the systematic review and meta-analysis. The first pass success rate of ETI was more likely to fail in the helicopter setting as compared to the ground (82,4% vs. 87,3%), but the final success rate was similar between the two settings (96,8% vs. 97,8%). The success rate of intubation in literature was reported higher in physician-staffed HEMS than in paramedic-staffed HEMS. The impact of aircraft type and location inside the vehicle on intubation success rates was inconclusive across studies. The meta-analysis revealed inconsistent results for the mean duration of intubation, with one study reporting shorter intubation times in helicopters (13,0s vs.15,5s), another reporting no significant differences (16,5s vs. 16,8s), and a third reporting longer intubation times in helicopters (16,1s vs. 15,0s). Conclusion Further research is needed to assess the impact of environmental factors on the quality of ETI on HEMS. While the success rate of endotracheal intubation in helicopters vs. on the ground is not significantly different, the duration and time to secure the airway, and Cormack-Lehane Score may be influenced by environmental factors. However, the limited number of studies reporting on these factors highlights the need for further research in this area. Endotracheal intubation (dpeaa)DE-He213 Systematic review (dpeaa)DE-He213 Meta-analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Helicopter (dpeaa)DE-He213 Ground (dpeaa)DE-He213 First pass success rate (dpeaa)DE-He213 HEMS (dpeaa)DE-He213 Time of intubation (dpeaa)DE-He213 Völlering, Jan-Jakob verfasserin (orcid)0009-0002-0516-7785 aut De Robertis, Edoardo verfasserin (orcid)0000-0001-9182-6964 aut Hinkelbein, Jochen verfasserin (orcid)0000-0003-3585-9459 aut Schmitz, Jan verfasserin (orcid)0000-0003-0282-097X aut Warnecke, Tobias verfasserin (orcid)0000-0003-4423-6114 aut Enthalten in Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine BioMed Central, 2008 32(2024), 1 vom: 10. Mai (DE-627)582019125 (DE-600)2455990-8 1757-7241 nnns volume:32 year:2024 number:1 day:10 month:05 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13049-024-01213-1 X:SPRINGER Resolving-System kostenfrei Volltext SYSFLAG_0 GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 32 2024 1 10 05 |
allfieldsGer |
10.1186/s13049-024-01213-1 doi (DE-627)SPR055813836 (SPR)s13049-024-01213-1-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 VZ Kolaparambil Varghese, Lydia Johnson verfasserin (orcid)0000-0002-2247-5395 aut Efficacy of endotracheal intubation in helicopter cabin vs. ground: a systematic review and meta-analysis 2024 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Author(s) 2024 Background Pre-hospital endotracheal intubation (ETI) is a sophisticated procedure with a comparatively high failure rate. Especially, ETI in confined spaces may result in higher difficulty, longer times, and a higher failure rate. This study analyses if Helicopter Emergency Medical Services (HEMS) intubation (time-to) success are influenced by noise, light, and restricted space in comparison to ground intubation. Available literature reporting these parameters was very limited, thus the reported differences between ETI in helicopter vs. ground by confronting parameters such as time to secure airway, first pass success rate and Cormack-Lehane Score were analysed. Methods A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted using PUBMED, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Ovid on October 15th, 2022. The database search provided 2322 studies and 6 studies met inclusion and quality criteria. The research was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42022361793). Results A total of six studies were selected and analysed as part of the systematic review and meta-analysis. The first pass success rate of ETI was more likely to fail in the helicopter setting as compared to the ground (82,4% vs. 87,3%), but the final success rate was similar between the two settings (96,8% vs. 97,8%). The success rate of intubation in literature was reported higher in physician-staffed HEMS than in paramedic-staffed HEMS. The impact of aircraft type and location inside the vehicle on intubation success rates was inconclusive across studies. The meta-analysis revealed inconsistent results for the mean duration of intubation, with one study reporting shorter intubation times in helicopters (13,0s vs.15,5s), another reporting no significant differences (16,5s vs. 16,8s), and a third reporting longer intubation times in helicopters (16,1s vs. 15,0s). Conclusion Further research is needed to assess the impact of environmental factors on the quality of ETI on HEMS. While the success rate of endotracheal intubation in helicopters vs. on the ground is not significantly different, the duration and time to secure the airway, and Cormack-Lehane Score may be influenced by environmental factors. However, the limited number of studies reporting on these factors highlights the need for further research in this area. Endotracheal intubation (dpeaa)DE-He213 Systematic review (dpeaa)DE-He213 Meta-analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Helicopter (dpeaa)DE-He213 Ground (dpeaa)DE-He213 First pass success rate (dpeaa)DE-He213 HEMS (dpeaa)DE-He213 Time of intubation (dpeaa)DE-He213 Völlering, Jan-Jakob verfasserin (orcid)0009-0002-0516-7785 aut De Robertis, Edoardo verfasserin (orcid)0000-0001-9182-6964 aut Hinkelbein, Jochen verfasserin (orcid)0000-0003-3585-9459 aut Schmitz, Jan verfasserin (orcid)0000-0003-0282-097X aut Warnecke, Tobias verfasserin (orcid)0000-0003-4423-6114 aut Enthalten in Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine BioMed Central, 2008 32(2024), 1 vom: 10. Mai (DE-627)582019125 (DE-600)2455990-8 1757-7241 nnns volume:32 year:2024 number:1 day:10 month:05 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13049-024-01213-1 X:SPRINGER Resolving-System kostenfrei Volltext SYSFLAG_0 GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 32 2024 1 10 05 |
allfieldsSound |
10.1186/s13049-024-01213-1 doi (DE-627)SPR055813836 (SPR)s13049-024-01213-1-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 VZ Kolaparambil Varghese, Lydia Johnson verfasserin (orcid)0000-0002-2247-5395 aut Efficacy of endotracheal intubation in helicopter cabin vs. ground: a systematic review and meta-analysis 2024 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Author(s) 2024 Background Pre-hospital endotracheal intubation (ETI) is a sophisticated procedure with a comparatively high failure rate. Especially, ETI in confined spaces may result in higher difficulty, longer times, and a higher failure rate. This study analyses if Helicopter Emergency Medical Services (HEMS) intubation (time-to) success are influenced by noise, light, and restricted space in comparison to ground intubation. Available literature reporting these parameters was very limited, thus the reported differences between ETI in helicopter vs. ground by confronting parameters such as time to secure airway, first pass success rate and Cormack-Lehane Score were analysed. Methods A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted using PUBMED, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Ovid on October 15th, 2022. The database search provided 2322 studies and 6 studies met inclusion and quality criteria. The research was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42022361793). Results A total of six studies were selected and analysed as part of the systematic review and meta-analysis. The first pass success rate of ETI was more likely to fail in the helicopter setting as compared to the ground (82,4% vs. 87,3%), but the final success rate was similar between the two settings (96,8% vs. 97,8%). The success rate of intubation in literature was reported higher in physician-staffed HEMS than in paramedic-staffed HEMS. The impact of aircraft type and location inside the vehicle on intubation success rates was inconclusive across studies. The meta-analysis revealed inconsistent results for the mean duration of intubation, with one study reporting shorter intubation times in helicopters (13,0s vs.15,5s), another reporting no significant differences (16,5s vs. 16,8s), and a third reporting longer intubation times in helicopters (16,1s vs. 15,0s). Conclusion Further research is needed to assess the impact of environmental factors on the quality of ETI on HEMS. While the success rate of endotracheal intubation in helicopters vs. on the ground is not significantly different, the duration and time to secure the airway, and Cormack-Lehane Score may be influenced by environmental factors. However, the limited number of studies reporting on these factors highlights the need for further research in this area. Endotracheal intubation (dpeaa)DE-He213 Systematic review (dpeaa)DE-He213 Meta-analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Helicopter (dpeaa)DE-He213 Ground (dpeaa)DE-He213 First pass success rate (dpeaa)DE-He213 HEMS (dpeaa)DE-He213 Time of intubation (dpeaa)DE-He213 Völlering, Jan-Jakob verfasserin (orcid)0009-0002-0516-7785 aut De Robertis, Edoardo verfasserin (orcid)0000-0001-9182-6964 aut Hinkelbein, Jochen verfasserin (orcid)0000-0003-3585-9459 aut Schmitz, Jan verfasserin (orcid)0000-0003-0282-097X aut Warnecke, Tobias verfasserin (orcid)0000-0003-4423-6114 aut Enthalten in Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine BioMed Central, 2008 32(2024), 1 vom: 10. Mai (DE-627)582019125 (DE-600)2455990-8 1757-7241 nnns volume:32 year:2024 number:1 day:10 month:05 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13049-024-01213-1 X:SPRINGER Resolving-System kostenfrei Volltext SYSFLAG_0 GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 32 2024 1 10 05 |
language |
English |
source |
Enthalten in Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine 32(2024), 1 vom: 10. Mai volume:32 year:2024 number:1 day:10 month:05 |
sourceStr |
Enthalten in Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine 32(2024), 1 vom: 10. Mai volume:32 year:2024 number:1 day:10 month:05 |
format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
institution |
findex.gbv.de |
topic_facet |
Endotracheal intubation Systematic review Meta-analysis Helicopter Ground First pass success rate HEMS Time of intubation |
dewey-raw |
610 |
isfreeaccess_bool |
true |
container_title |
Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine |
authorswithroles_txt_mv |
Kolaparambil Varghese, Lydia Johnson @@aut@@ Völlering, Jan-Jakob @@aut@@ De Robertis, Edoardo @@aut@@ Hinkelbein, Jochen @@aut@@ Schmitz, Jan @@aut@@ Warnecke, Tobias @@aut@@ |
publishDateDaySort_date |
2024-05-10T00:00:00Z |
hierarchy_top_id |
582019125 |
dewey-sort |
3610 |
id |
SPR055813836 |
language_de |
englisch |
fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000naa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">SPR055813836</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20240511064715.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">240511s2024 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1186/s13049-024-01213-1</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR055813836</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)s13049-024-01213-1-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">610</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Kolaparambil Varghese, Lydia Johnson</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="0">(orcid)0000-0002-2247-5395</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Efficacy of endotracheal intubation in helicopter cabin vs. ground: a systematic review and meta-analysis</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2024</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© The Author(s) 2024</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Background Pre-hospital endotracheal intubation (ETI) is a sophisticated procedure with a comparatively high failure rate. Especially, ETI in confined spaces may result in higher difficulty, longer times, and a higher failure rate. This study analyses if Helicopter Emergency Medical Services (HEMS) intubation (time-to) success are influenced by noise, light, and restricted space in comparison to ground intubation. Available literature reporting these parameters was very limited, thus the reported differences between ETI in helicopter vs. ground by confronting parameters such as time to secure airway, first pass success rate and Cormack-Lehane Score were analysed. Methods A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted using PUBMED, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Ovid on October 15th, 2022. The database search provided 2322 studies and 6 studies met inclusion and quality criteria. The research was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42022361793). Results A total of six studies were selected and analysed as part of the systematic review and meta-analysis. The first pass success rate of ETI was more likely to fail in the helicopter setting as compared to the ground (82,4% vs. 87,3%), but the final success rate was similar between the two settings (96,8% vs. 97,8%). The success rate of intubation in literature was reported higher in physician-staffed HEMS than in paramedic-staffed HEMS. The impact of aircraft type and location inside the vehicle on intubation success rates was inconclusive across studies. The meta-analysis revealed inconsistent results for the mean duration of intubation, with one study reporting shorter intubation times in helicopters (13,0s vs.15,5s), another reporting no significant differences (16,5s vs. 16,8s), and a third reporting longer intubation times in helicopters (16,1s vs. 15,0s). Conclusion Further research is needed to assess the impact of environmental factors on the quality of ETI on HEMS. While the success rate of endotracheal intubation in helicopters vs. on the ground is not significantly different, the duration and time to secure the airway, and Cormack-Lehane Score may be influenced by environmental factors. However, the limited number of studies reporting on these factors highlights the need for further research in this area.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Endotracheal intubation</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Systematic review</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Meta-analysis</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Helicopter</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Ground</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">First pass success rate</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">HEMS</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Time of intubation</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Völlering, Jan-Jakob</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="0">(orcid)0009-0002-0516-7785</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">De Robertis, Edoardo</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="0">(orcid)0000-0001-9182-6964</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Hinkelbein, Jochen</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="0">(orcid)0000-0003-3585-9459</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Schmitz, Jan</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="0">(orcid)0000-0003-0282-097X</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Warnecke, Tobias</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="0">(orcid)0000-0003-4423-6114</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine</subfield><subfield code="d">BioMed Central, 2008</subfield><subfield code="g">32(2024), 1 vom: 10. Mai</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)582019125</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2455990-8</subfield><subfield code="x">1757-7241</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:32</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2024</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield><subfield code="g">day:10</subfield><subfield code="g">month:05</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13049-024-01213-1</subfield><subfield code="m">X:SPRINGER</subfield><subfield code="x">Resolving-System</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_0</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">32</subfield><subfield code="j">2024</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield><subfield code="b">10</subfield><subfield code="c">05</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
author |
Kolaparambil Varghese, Lydia Johnson |
spellingShingle |
Kolaparambil Varghese, Lydia Johnson ddc 610 misc Endotracheal intubation misc Systematic review misc Meta-analysis misc Helicopter misc Ground misc First pass success rate misc HEMS misc Time of intubation Efficacy of endotracheal intubation in helicopter cabin vs. ground: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
authorStr |
Kolaparambil Varghese, Lydia Johnson |
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)582019125 |
format |
electronic Article |
dewey-ones |
610 - Medicine & health |
delete_txt_mv |
keep |
author_role |
aut aut aut aut aut aut |
collection |
springer |
remote_str |
true |
illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
issn |
1757-7241 |
topic_title |
610 VZ Efficacy of endotracheal intubation in helicopter cabin vs. ground: a systematic review and meta-analysis Endotracheal intubation (dpeaa)DE-He213 Systematic review (dpeaa)DE-He213 Meta-analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Helicopter (dpeaa)DE-He213 Ground (dpeaa)DE-He213 First pass success rate (dpeaa)DE-He213 HEMS (dpeaa)DE-He213 Time of intubation (dpeaa)DE-He213 |
topic |
ddc 610 misc Endotracheal intubation misc Systematic review misc Meta-analysis misc Helicopter misc Ground misc First pass success rate misc HEMS misc Time of intubation |
topic_unstemmed |
ddc 610 misc Endotracheal intubation misc Systematic review misc Meta-analysis misc Helicopter misc Ground misc First pass success rate misc HEMS misc Time of intubation |
topic_browse |
ddc 610 misc Endotracheal intubation misc Systematic review misc Meta-analysis misc Helicopter misc Ground misc First pass success rate misc HEMS misc Time of intubation |
format_facet |
Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource |
format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
carriertype_str_mv |
cr |
hierarchy_parent_title |
Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine |
hierarchy_parent_id |
582019125 |
dewey-tens |
610 - Medicine & health |
hierarchy_top_title |
Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine |
isfreeaccess_txt |
true |
familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)582019125 (DE-600)2455990-8 |
title |
Efficacy of endotracheal intubation in helicopter cabin vs. ground: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
ctrlnum |
(DE-627)SPR055813836 (SPR)s13049-024-01213-1-e |
title_full |
Efficacy of endotracheal intubation in helicopter cabin vs. ground: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
author_sort |
Kolaparambil Varghese, Lydia Johnson |
journal |
Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine |
journalStr |
Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine |
lang_code |
eng |
isOA_bool |
true |
dewey-hundreds |
600 - Technology |
recordtype |
marc |
publishDateSort |
2024 |
contenttype_str_mv |
txt |
author_browse |
Kolaparambil Varghese, Lydia Johnson Völlering, Jan-Jakob De Robertis, Edoardo Hinkelbein, Jochen Schmitz, Jan Warnecke, Tobias |
container_volume |
32 |
class |
610 VZ |
format_se |
Elektronische Aufsätze |
author-letter |
Kolaparambil Varghese, Lydia Johnson |
doi_str_mv |
10.1186/s13049-024-01213-1 |
normlink |
(ORCID)0000-0002-2247-5395 (ORCID)0009-0002-0516-7785 (ORCID)0000-0001-9182-6964 (ORCID)0000-0003-3585-9459 (ORCID)0000-0003-0282-097X (ORCID)0000-0003-4423-6114 |
normlink_prefix_str_mv |
(orcid)0000-0002-2247-5395 (orcid)0009-0002-0516-7785 (orcid)0000-0001-9182-6964 (orcid)0000-0003-3585-9459 (orcid)0000-0003-0282-097X (orcid)0000-0003-4423-6114 |
dewey-full |
610 |
author2-role |
verfasserin |
title_sort |
efficacy of endotracheal intubation in helicopter cabin vs. ground: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_auth |
Efficacy of endotracheal intubation in helicopter cabin vs. ground: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
abstract |
Background Pre-hospital endotracheal intubation (ETI) is a sophisticated procedure with a comparatively high failure rate. Especially, ETI in confined spaces may result in higher difficulty, longer times, and a higher failure rate. This study analyses if Helicopter Emergency Medical Services (HEMS) intubation (time-to) success are influenced by noise, light, and restricted space in comparison to ground intubation. Available literature reporting these parameters was very limited, thus the reported differences between ETI in helicopter vs. ground by confronting parameters such as time to secure airway, first pass success rate and Cormack-Lehane Score were analysed. Methods A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted using PUBMED, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Ovid on October 15th, 2022. The database search provided 2322 studies and 6 studies met inclusion and quality criteria. The research was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42022361793). Results A total of six studies were selected and analysed as part of the systematic review and meta-analysis. The first pass success rate of ETI was more likely to fail in the helicopter setting as compared to the ground (82,4% vs. 87,3%), but the final success rate was similar between the two settings (96,8% vs. 97,8%). The success rate of intubation in literature was reported higher in physician-staffed HEMS than in paramedic-staffed HEMS. The impact of aircraft type and location inside the vehicle on intubation success rates was inconclusive across studies. The meta-analysis revealed inconsistent results for the mean duration of intubation, with one study reporting shorter intubation times in helicopters (13,0s vs.15,5s), another reporting no significant differences (16,5s vs. 16,8s), and a third reporting longer intubation times in helicopters (16,1s vs. 15,0s). Conclusion Further research is needed to assess the impact of environmental factors on the quality of ETI on HEMS. While the success rate of endotracheal intubation in helicopters vs. on the ground is not significantly different, the duration and time to secure the airway, and Cormack-Lehane Score may be influenced by environmental factors. However, the limited number of studies reporting on these factors highlights the need for further research in this area. © The Author(s) 2024 |
abstractGer |
Background Pre-hospital endotracheal intubation (ETI) is a sophisticated procedure with a comparatively high failure rate. Especially, ETI in confined spaces may result in higher difficulty, longer times, and a higher failure rate. This study analyses if Helicopter Emergency Medical Services (HEMS) intubation (time-to) success are influenced by noise, light, and restricted space in comparison to ground intubation. Available literature reporting these parameters was very limited, thus the reported differences between ETI in helicopter vs. ground by confronting parameters such as time to secure airway, first pass success rate and Cormack-Lehane Score were analysed. Methods A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted using PUBMED, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Ovid on October 15th, 2022. The database search provided 2322 studies and 6 studies met inclusion and quality criteria. The research was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42022361793). Results A total of six studies were selected and analysed as part of the systematic review and meta-analysis. The first pass success rate of ETI was more likely to fail in the helicopter setting as compared to the ground (82,4% vs. 87,3%), but the final success rate was similar between the two settings (96,8% vs. 97,8%). The success rate of intubation in literature was reported higher in physician-staffed HEMS than in paramedic-staffed HEMS. The impact of aircraft type and location inside the vehicle on intubation success rates was inconclusive across studies. The meta-analysis revealed inconsistent results for the mean duration of intubation, with one study reporting shorter intubation times in helicopters (13,0s vs.15,5s), another reporting no significant differences (16,5s vs. 16,8s), and a third reporting longer intubation times in helicopters (16,1s vs. 15,0s). Conclusion Further research is needed to assess the impact of environmental factors on the quality of ETI on HEMS. While the success rate of endotracheal intubation in helicopters vs. on the ground is not significantly different, the duration and time to secure the airway, and Cormack-Lehane Score may be influenced by environmental factors. However, the limited number of studies reporting on these factors highlights the need for further research in this area. © The Author(s) 2024 |
abstract_unstemmed |
Background Pre-hospital endotracheal intubation (ETI) is a sophisticated procedure with a comparatively high failure rate. Especially, ETI in confined spaces may result in higher difficulty, longer times, and a higher failure rate. This study analyses if Helicopter Emergency Medical Services (HEMS) intubation (time-to) success are influenced by noise, light, and restricted space in comparison to ground intubation. Available literature reporting these parameters was very limited, thus the reported differences between ETI in helicopter vs. ground by confronting parameters such as time to secure airway, first pass success rate and Cormack-Lehane Score were analysed. Methods A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted using PUBMED, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Ovid on October 15th, 2022. The database search provided 2322 studies and 6 studies met inclusion and quality criteria. The research was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42022361793). Results A total of six studies were selected and analysed as part of the systematic review and meta-analysis. The first pass success rate of ETI was more likely to fail in the helicopter setting as compared to the ground (82,4% vs. 87,3%), but the final success rate was similar between the two settings (96,8% vs. 97,8%). The success rate of intubation in literature was reported higher in physician-staffed HEMS than in paramedic-staffed HEMS. The impact of aircraft type and location inside the vehicle on intubation success rates was inconclusive across studies. The meta-analysis revealed inconsistent results for the mean duration of intubation, with one study reporting shorter intubation times in helicopters (13,0s vs.15,5s), another reporting no significant differences (16,5s vs. 16,8s), and a third reporting longer intubation times in helicopters (16,1s vs. 15,0s). Conclusion Further research is needed to assess the impact of environmental factors on the quality of ETI on HEMS. While the success rate of endotracheal intubation in helicopters vs. on the ground is not significantly different, the duration and time to secure the airway, and Cormack-Lehane Score may be influenced by environmental factors. However, the limited number of studies reporting on these factors highlights the need for further research in this area. © The Author(s) 2024 |
collection_details |
SYSFLAG_0 GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 |
container_issue |
1 |
title_short |
Efficacy of endotracheal intubation in helicopter cabin vs. ground: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
url |
https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13049-024-01213-1 |
remote_bool |
true |
author2 |
Völlering, Jan-Jakob De Robertis, Edoardo Hinkelbein, Jochen Schmitz, Jan Warnecke, Tobias |
author2Str |
Völlering, Jan-Jakob De Robertis, Edoardo Hinkelbein, Jochen Schmitz, Jan Warnecke, Tobias |
ppnlink |
582019125 |
mediatype_str_mv |
c |
isOA_txt |
true |
hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
doi_str |
10.1186/s13049-024-01213-1 |
up_date |
2024-07-03T18:12:00.531Z |
_version_ |
1803582513383211008 |
fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000naa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">SPR055813836</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20240511064715.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">240511s2024 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1186/s13049-024-01213-1</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR055813836</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)s13049-024-01213-1-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">610</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Kolaparambil Varghese, Lydia Johnson</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="0">(orcid)0000-0002-2247-5395</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Efficacy of endotracheal intubation in helicopter cabin vs. ground: a systematic review and meta-analysis</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2024</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© The Author(s) 2024</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Background Pre-hospital endotracheal intubation (ETI) is a sophisticated procedure with a comparatively high failure rate. Especially, ETI in confined spaces may result in higher difficulty, longer times, and a higher failure rate. This study analyses if Helicopter Emergency Medical Services (HEMS) intubation (time-to) success are influenced by noise, light, and restricted space in comparison to ground intubation. Available literature reporting these parameters was very limited, thus the reported differences between ETI in helicopter vs. ground by confronting parameters such as time to secure airway, first pass success rate and Cormack-Lehane Score were analysed. Methods A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted using PUBMED, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Ovid on October 15th, 2022. The database search provided 2322 studies and 6 studies met inclusion and quality criteria. The research was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42022361793). Results A total of six studies were selected and analysed as part of the systematic review and meta-analysis. The first pass success rate of ETI was more likely to fail in the helicopter setting as compared to the ground (82,4% vs. 87,3%), but the final success rate was similar between the two settings (96,8% vs. 97,8%). The success rate of intubation in literature was reported higher in physician-staffed HEMS than in paramedic-staffed HEMS. The impact of aircraft type and location inside the vehicle on intubation success rates was inconclusive across studies. The meta-analysis revealed inconsistent results for the mean duration of intubation, with one study reporting shorter intubation times in helicopters (13,0s vs.15,5s), another reporting no significant differences (16,5s vs. 16,8s), and a third reporting longer intubation times in helicopters (16,1s vs. 15,0s). Conclusion Further research is needed to assess the impact of environmental factors on the quality of ETI on HEMS. While the success rate of endotracheal intubation in helicopters vs. on the ground is not significantly different, the duration and time to secure the airway, and Cormack-Lehane Score may be influenced by environmental factors. However, the limited number of studies reporting on these factors highlights the need for further research in this area.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Endotracheal intubation</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Systematic review</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Meta-analysis</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Helicopter</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Ground</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">First pass success rate</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">HEMS</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Time of intubation</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Völlering, Jan-Jakob</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="0">(orcid)0009-0002-0516-7785</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">De Robertis, Edoardo</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="0">(orcid)0000-0001-9182-6964</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Hinkelbein, Jochen</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="0">(orcid)0000-0003-3585-9459</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Schmitz, Jan</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="0">(orcid)0000-0003-0282-097X</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Warnecke, Tobias</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="0">(orcid)0000-0003-4423-6114</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine</subfield><subfield code="d">BioMed Central, 2008</subfield><subfield code="g">32(2024), 1 vom: 10. Mai</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)582019125</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2455990-8</subfield><subfield code="x">1757-7241</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:32</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2024</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield><subfield code="g">day:10</subfield><subfield code="g">month:05</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13049-024-01213-1</subfield><subfield code="m">X:SPRINGER</subfield><subfield code="x">Resolving-System</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_0</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">32</subfield><subfield code="j">2024</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield><subfield code="b">10</subfield><subfield code="c">05</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
score |
7.401184 |